alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AHL
SERVICES, INC. CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND
THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           2,102
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   43,339
<ALLOWANCES>                                       462
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                49,436
<PP&E>                                          17,553
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,585
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,337
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           26,770
<BONDS>                                         12,013
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           109
<OTHER-SE>                                      31,165
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,337
<SALES>                                        196,563
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               196,563
<CGS>                                          146,011
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  146,011
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                43,290
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   102
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 995
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,710
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,585
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,125
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    385
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,740
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .36
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .36
        

</TABLE>
DONALD STANLEY VERNE,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 1 6

- 0712

Opinion filed March 9, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

Donald Stanley Verne

, pro se , Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Baker v. State , 878 So.

2d 1236 (Fla. 2004).

LEWIS

, SWANSON , and WINOKUR , JJ., CONCUR.
# C_2020378EN.01003402.xml

| 9.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 378/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 378/34

---

Order of the General Court of 10 September 2020 –ADESO v Commission

(Case T-529/19) (1)

(Action for annulment - Grant contracts relating to the projects ‘Your Environment is Your Life’ and ‘Social Safety Net for Poor and Vulnerable Households in Northern Regions of Somalia/Somaliland Phase II’ - Non-eligible costs - Debit notes - Confirmation letter - Challengeable act - Contractual nature of the dispute - Act not open to challenge - Act forming part of a purely contractual framework from which it is inseparable - Inadmissibility)

(2020/C 378/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: African Development Solutions (ADESO) (Nairobi, Kenya) (represented by: R. Martens, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Estrada de Solà, M. Ilkova and A. Katsimerou, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of a Commission decision allegedly contained in a letter dated 10 May 2019 concerning the recovery of certain sums paid under grant contracts relating to the projects ‘Your Environment is Your Life’ (FED/2013/313-770) and ‘Social Safety Net for Poor and Vulnerable Households in Northern Regions of Somalia/Somaliland Phase II’ (FED/2013/316-291).

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | African Development Solutions (ADESO) shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

African Development Solutions (ADESO) shall pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 357, 21.10.2019.

---
# C_2020068EN.01003601.xml

| 2.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 68/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 68/36

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Krajský soud v Ostravě (Czech Republic) lodged on 27 December 2019 — Samohýl group a. s. v Generální ředitelství cel

(Case C-941/19)

(2020/C 68/38)

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Krajský soud v Ostravě

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Samohýl group a. s.

Defendant: Generální ředitelství cel

Question referred

Should the product labelled ‘Bob Martin Clear 50 mg roztok pro nakapání na kůži — spot-on pro kočky’ made available in pipettes (0.5 ml), which contains the active substance fipronil (50 mg per pipette) and the excipients butylated hydroxyanisole E 320, butylated hydroxytoluene E 321, benzyl alcohol and diethylene glycol monoethyl ether, be classified under heading 3004 or heading 3808 of the Combined Nomenclature of the Customs Tariff?

---
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 February 29, 2008
    
    /s/ THOMAS L. MITCHELLThomas L. MitchellSenior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurerand Controller of Noble Corporation
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 138 (Thursday, July 22, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 38733]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15620]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-3561-EM; Docket ID FEMA-2021-0001]


Florida; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of an Emergency Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of an emergency declaration for 
the State of Florida (FEMA-3561-EM), dated July 4, 2021, and related 
determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued July 9, 2021.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of an emergency declaration for 
the State of Florida is hereby amended to include the following areas 
among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the 
event declared an emergency by the President in his declaration of July 
4, 2021.

    Baker, Bradford, Clay, Duval, Nassau, Putnam, and Union Counties 
for emergency protective measures (Category B), limited to direct 
Federal assistance and reimbursement for mass care including 
evacuation and shelter support.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Deanne Criswell,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2021-15620 Filed 7-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 9 

To reform America’s political system and eliminate gridlock that blocks 

progress. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 25 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 2011 

Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. BROWN of Ohio, Mr. 

KERRY, Mr. BENNET, Mrs. GILLIBRAND, Mrs. BOXER, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. BEGICH, and Mr. AKAKA) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration 

A BILL 

To reform America’s political system and eliminate gridlock 

that blocks progress. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Political Reform and 

5 Gridlock Elimination Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SENSE OF THE SENATE. 

7 It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should— 

8 (1) pass the DISCLOSE Act to prevent a cor9 porate takeover of our elections and ensure that our 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 9 IS

1 democracy is open, transparent, and controlled by 

2 the people; and 

3 (2) reform Senate rules and procedures to re4 duce excessive obstruction and delay, while pro5 tecting the legitimate rights of individual Senators 

6 and the minority. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
# C_2019139EN.01009201.xml

| 15.4.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/92 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/92

---

Action brought on 20 February 2019 — Kazembe Musonda v Council

(Case T-110/19)

(2019/C 139/91)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Jean-Claude Kazembe Musonda (Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of the Congo) (represented by: T. Bontinck, P. De Wolf, M. Forgeois, and A. Guillerme, lawyers)

Defendant: Council of the European Union

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 10 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/1940 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 10 in Annex II to Decision 2010/788/CFSP;

| — | annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 10 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul Council Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1931 of 10 December 2018, in so far as the applicant remains at No 10 in Annex Ia to Regulation (EC) No 1183/2005;

| — | rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 1183/2005/EC are unlawful; |
| --- | --- |

—

rule that the provisions of Article 3(2)(b) of Decision 2010/788/CFSP and Article 2b(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) 1183/2005/EC are unlawful;

| — | order the Council to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Council to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law which are in essence identical or similar to those raised in Case T-103/19, Mende Omalanga v Council.

---
# Official Journal C 97A/15 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 97A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6115 March 2018 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 97A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6115 March 2018

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Announcements |
| | ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES |
| | European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO) |
| 2018/C 97 A/01 | Notice of open competitions — Administrators in the field of public health (AD 6): EPSO/AD/340/18 — Health and food safety — audit, inspection and evaluation — EPSO/AD/341/18 — Food safety — policy and legislation | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

V   Announcements

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

European Personnel Selection Office (EPSO)

2018/C 97 A/01

Notice of open competitions — Administrators in the field of public health (AD 6): EPSO/AD/340/18 — Health and food safety — audit, inspection and evaluation — EPSO/AD/341/18 — Food safety — policy and legislation

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Dwayne FERGUSON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-8319.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Jan. 13, 2009.

Decided: Jan. 20, 2009.

Dwayne Ferguson, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen David Schiller, Olivia N. Hawkins, Office of the United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before WILLIAMS, Chief Judge, and TRAXLER and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding-precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Dwayne Ferguson appeals the district court order denying his Fed.R.Crim.P. 33 motion for a new tidal. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Ferguson filed his motion for a new trial over four years after the jury returned its guilty verdict and more than three years after the judgment of conviction was entered. A motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence must be filed within three years after the finding of guilt. Ferguson exceeded the time limit provided by Fed.R.Crim.P. 33. Therefore, the district court properly denied the motion.

Accordingly, we affirm for the order of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
#### C. Malcolm Dowsey et al., Respondents, v John Megerian, Individually and as Executor of Dorothy Megerian, Deceased, Appellant.

—In a declaratory judgment action pursuant to RPAPL article 15, defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Pantano, J.), entered September 18, 1984, which, *inter alia,*declared a certain deed to, and lease of, real property to be void as made as part of a usurious loan in violation of General Obligations Law §§ 5-501 and 5-511.

Judgment reversed, on the law, with costs, and it is declared that the deed and lease in question are valid.

The instant appeal involves an action brought by the plaintiffs in March 1984, for a declaration that a certain deed conveying real property in Roslyn, New York, to John and Dorothy Megerian and a lease of the same property from the Megerians to the plaintiffs, were, in substance, part of usurious loan transaction and therefore void.

Prior to the commencement of the plaintiffs’ action, the defendant John Megerian, individually and as executor of the estate of Dorothy Megerian, had commenced an eviction proceeding against the plaintiffs in the District Court of Nassau County for nonpayment of rent under the lease in issue. The plaintiffs appeared in court on the return date, which had *704been adjourned at their request, but did not raise any defenses to the petition. On January 5, 1984, the parties entered into a written stipulation in which the plaintiffs acknowledged their default under the lease and agreed to pay certain arrearages in accordance with a set schedule. They subsequently defaulted under the terms of the stipulation.

We find that since the plaintiffs admitted their default under the lease without arguing before the District Court that the parties’ relationship was anything other than landlord and tenants, or that the lease was actually a disguise for a usurious mortgage, they are now barred from asserting those claims in their present action *(see, Reich v Cochran,*151 NY 122, *rearg denied*151 NY 669). Moreover, since the parties’ stipulation expressly referred to the plaintiffs’ default under the May 26, 1983 "Lease” and provided for a payment schedule of arrears for "use and occupancy/rent” of the subject premises, there is no question that the plaintiffs conceded the question of title and cannot raise that issue in their present action *(see, O’Frias v Melton,*32 AD2d 1046, *affd*27 NY2d 638). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
# C_2019295EN.01005601.xml

| 2.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/56

---

Action brought on 25 June 2019 — Rosca v Commission

(Case T-434/19)

(2019/C 295/73)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Ioana-Felicia Rosca (Vienna, Austria) (represented by: L. Tufler, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul, first, the jury’s decision in Open Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 (AD7) — 2 (Administrators in field of taxation) to exclude the applicant from the next phase of the competition (Assessment Centre) following her request for review and, second, all the results of the phase Talent Screener; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul, first, the jury’s decision in Open Competition EPSO/AD/363/18 (AD7) — 2 (Administrators in field of taxation) to exclude the applicant from the next phase of the competition (Assessment Centre) following her request for review and, second, all the results of the phase Talent Screener;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on three pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 90 of the Staff Regulations. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 90 of the Staff Regulations.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 27 of the Staff Regulations. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 27 of the Staff Regulations.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of equal treatment between candidates during the selection process based on qualifications. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging breach of the principle of equal treatment between candidates during the selection process based on qualifications.

---
No. PD-1631-14 & PD-1632-14 

IN THE

Court of Criminal Appeals 

At Austin

__________ 

JIMMIE JOHNSON,

Appellant 

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Appellee 

_________ 

Cause numbers 1346765 & 1366083 

In the 338th Judicial District Court 

Of Harris County, Texas 

Cause numbers 01-13-01056-CR & 01-13-01057-CR

In the Court of Appeals for the First Judicial District 

_________ 

Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time Within 

Which to file Petition for Discretionary Review 

__________ 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS: 

 JIMMIE JOHNSON, the appellant, under TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1 & 10.5(b), moves 

for an extension of time within which to file his petition for discretionary review. In 

support of his motion, the appellant submits the following: 

(A) The appellant’s petition for discretionary review is due on December 1, 

2014. 

PD-1631-14 & PD-1632-14

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 3/4/2015 2:55:50 PM

Accepted 3/6/2015 2:16:17 PM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
2

(B) The appellant seeks an extension of time until today to file the appellant’s 

petition for discretionary review. 

(C) The appellant relies upon the following facts to reasonably explain the need 

for an extension:

Due to an unexpected hospitalization, the undersigned was unable to 

complete the appellant’s petition by and requests an additional 

extension of time to file the petition that accompanies this motion.

(D) One previous motion requesting an extension of time to file the appellant’s 

petition for discretionary review has been requested or granted. 

WHEREFORE, the appellant prays that this Court will grant the requested 

extension. 

Respectfully submitted,

__/s/__Kelly Smith___________

KELLY ANN SMITH

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE & SERVICE

Pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 9.5, this certifies that this document contains 290

words and a copy of the foregoing was electronically served on the State of Texas. 

__/s/__Kelly Smith___________

KELLY ANN SMITH

Texas Bar No. 00797867

P.O. Box 10751

Houston, TX 77206

281-734-0668

Kelly.A.Smith.06@gmail.com

Counsel for the appellant
THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE 

CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING 

EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR. 

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA 

In The Supreme Court 

The State, Respondent, 

v. 

Wayne Albeon Scott, Jr., Petitioner. 

Appellate Case No. 2016-000067 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF APPEALS 

Appeal From Florence County 

Howard King, Circuit Court Judge 

Memorandum Opinion No. 2017-MO-010 

Heard May 2, 2017 – Filed May 31, 2017 

CERTIORARI DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY 

GRANTED 

Appellate Defender LaNelle Cantey DuRant, of 

Columbia, for Petitioner. 

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Chief Deputy 

Attorney General J. Robert Bolchoz, and Senior Assistant 

Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka, all of 
 

Columbia; Solicitor Edgar Lewis Clements, III, of 

Florence, all for Respondent. 

PER CURIAM: We granted Wayne Albeon Scott, Jr.'s petition for a writ of 

certiorari to review the Court of Appeals' decision affirming the circuit court's 

refusal to grant Scott immunity under the South Carolina Protection of Persons and 

Property Act. State v. Scott, Op. No. 2015-UP-513 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Nov. 12, 

2015). We now dismiss the writ as improvidently granted. 

DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED. 

BEATTY, C.J., KITTREDGE, HEARN, FEW, JJ., and Acting Justice 

DeAndrea Benjamin, concur.